thedrifter
10-25-05, 02:35 PM
October 31, 2005
Troops cry foul over DNA order
By Deborah Funk
Times staff writer
Service members convicted by the military of offenses carrying a possible sentence of more than a year in prison are being told to submit DNA samples to a national criminal database — even if those offenses have no civilian equivalent, and even if their cases are still on appeal.
The services were ordered in an April memo to begin collecting samples, and letters informing affected troops of the requirement are going out. The memo was signed by David S.C. Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
The DNA collection effort is causing a stir among service members convicted of disobeying an order to take anthrax vaccine when the military’s inoculation program was mandatory.
“When I first got this, I thought, ‘Did someone botch my paperwork and turn me into a sexual predator or murdering psychopath?’” said Ocean Rose, 25, a Marine who is on appellate leave while appealing his conviction for disobeying an order to take anthrax vaccination shots.
A federal judge shut down the controversial mandatory anthrax vaccination program a year ago, ruling that the vaccine was not properly licensed to protect against inhalation anthrax. Shots now are given only if troops volunteer for them.
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., former chairman of the House Government Reform Committee that investigated the vaccine several years ago, has asked Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to suspend seeking DNA samples in anthrax vaccine cases.
“These men are not hardened criminals, they are soldiers who stood up for their rights in the face of a questionable order,” Burton wrote in an Oct. 3 letter to Rumsfeld. “It would be a travesty of justice, especially before all appeals in this matter have been exhausted, to require these men to submit their DNA.”
But the Pentagon says that under the Justice For All Act of 2004, certain kinds of offenders in both the military and civilian legal systems must submit DNA samples to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS.
That includes anyone convicted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice of an offense that carries a sentence of more than a year behind bars — even if a lesser sentence is imposed.
“It’s not hard to find offenses under the UCMJ that in theory would expose you to a year [of] confinement,” said Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice. “This is DNA run amok.”
Requesting DNA samples from people convicted in military court for crimes that have no civilian equivalent, such as disobeying an order, is particularly egregious, critics say.
Former Air Force attorney John J. Michels Jr., who represents six anonymous service members and Defense Department civilians who sued to stop the mandatory vaccine program, said orders to take the shots have been proven illegal.
The six plaintiffs prevailed in a lower federal court ruling that shut down the mandatory vaccine program, but the government has appealed that case. Arguments are set for Dec. 1 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Since the judge ruled the vaccine cannot be forced on service members, Michels said he would not expect the government to pursue the DNA samples from those who refused the vaccine.
But the letters sent to service members about the DNA samples serve as lawful orders, and service members are reminded that they still fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice while on appellate leave. They are told that if they do not comply, they could be recalled to active duty, the implication being that they could be prosecuted.
Should their convictions be overturned, they can request that their DNA analysis record be erased. But Michels has little faith the bureaucracy would work well enough to remove the record.
“If it gets into this kind of database, it will stay there,” he said.
Rose, the former Marine, has already complied with the order to contact authorities to arrange to submit his DNA sample.
“Do I like the idea? No,” he said.
“Is this another way to make my life miserable and put me out a little bit more? Probably.”
Ellie
Troops cry foul over DNA order
By Deborah Funk
Times staff writer
Service members convicted by the military of offenses carrying a possible sentence of more than a year in prison are being told to submit DNA samples to a national criminal database — even if those offenses have no civilian equivalent, and even if their cases are still on appeal.
The services were ordered in an April memo to begin collecting samples, and letters informing affected troops of the requirement are going out. The memo was signed by David S.C. Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
The DNA collection effort is causing a stir among service members convicted of disobeying an order to take anthrax vaccine when the military’s inoculation program was mandatory.
“When I first got this, I thought, ‘Did someone botch my paperwork and turn me into a sexual predator or murdering psychopath?’” said Ocean Rose, 25, a Marine who is on appellate leave while appealing his conviction for disobeying an order to take anthrax vaccination shots.
A federal judge shut down the controversial mandatory anthrax vaccination program a year ago, ruling that the vaccine was not properly licensed to protect against inhalation anthrax. Shots now are given only if troops volunteer for them.
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., former chairman of the House Government Reform Committee that investigated the vaccine several years ago, has asked Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to suspend seeking DNA samples in anthrax vaccine cases.
“These men are not hardened criminals, they are soldiers who stood up for their rights in the face of a questionable order,” Burton wrote in an Oct. 3 letter to Rumsfeld. “It would be a travesty of justice, especially before all appeals in this matter have been exhausted, to require these men to submit their DNA.”
But the Pentagon says that under the Justice For All Act of 2004, certain kinds of offenders in both the military and civilian legal systems must submit DNA samples to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS.
That includes anyone convicted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice of an offense that carries a sentence of more than a year behind bars — even if a lesser sentence is imposed.
“It’s not hard to find offenses under the UCMJ that in theory would expose you to a year [of] confinement,” said Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice. “This is DNA run amok.”
Requesting DNA samples from people convicted in military court for crimes that have no civilian equivalent, such as disobeying an order, is particularly egregious, critics say.
Former Air Force attorney John J. Michels Jr., who represents six anonymous service members and Defense Department civilians who sued to stop the mandatory vaccine program, said orders to take the shots have been proven illegal.
The six plaintiffs prevailed in a lower federal court ruling that shut down the mandatory vaccine program, but the government has appealed that case. Arguments are set for Dec. 1 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Since the judge ruled the vaccine cannot be forced on service members, Michels said he would not expect the government to pursue the DNA samples from those who refused the vaccine.
But the letters sent to service members about the DNA samples serve as lawful orders, and service members are reminded that they still fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice while on appellate leave. They are told that if they do not comply, they could be recalled to active duty, the implication being that they could be prosecuted.
Should their convictions be overturned, they can request that their DNA analysis record be erased. But Michels has little faith the bureaucracy would work well enough to remove the record.
“If it gets into this kind of database, it will stay there,” he said.
Rose, the former Marine, has already complied with the order to contact authorities to arrange to submit his DNA sample.
“Do I like the idea? No,” he said.
“Is this another way to make my life miserable and put me out a little bit more? Probably.”
Ellie